db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bernt M. Johnsen" <Bernt.John...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-231) "FOR UPDATE" required for updatable result set to work
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:17:07 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andreas Korneliussen (JIRA) wrote (2005-11-08
13:03:20):
>      [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-231?page=all ]
> 
> Andreas Korneliussen updated DERBY-231:
> ---------------------------------------
> 
>     Attachment: DERBY-231.diff
>                 DERBY-231.stat
> 
> The update includes a new comment in CursorNode.java, regarding SQL
> compliance, and it also includes new tests for positioned updates
> and postioned deletes on queries not including "FOR UPDATE".

I have started testing with the intention of committing this patch.


> 
> > "FOR UPDATE" required for updatable result set to work
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >          Key: DERBY-231
> >          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-231
> >      Project: Derby
> >         Type: Improvement
> >   Components: SQL
> >     Versions: 10.0.2.1
> >     Reporter: Dag H. Wanvik
> >     Assignee: Andreas Korneliussen
> >     Priority: Minor
> >  Attachments: DERBY-231.diff, DERBY-231.stat, fff
> >
> > To get an updatable result set, the JDBC 3.0 spec, section 14.2.4 
> > "Modifying ResultSet Objects" states: 
> >     "ResultSet objects with concurrency CONCUR_UPDATABLE can be updated
> >      using ResultSet objects".
> > In addition, Derby requires the SQL SELECT statement to have a "FOR
> > UPDATE" clause for updates to be allowed. This may be a usability issue, as
> > many examples, e.g. in "JDBC API tutorial and reference and reference"
> > book and the JDBC 3.0 Specification (14.2.4.1) do not include a "FOR
> > UPDATE" clause in the SQL SELECT.
> > Mamta Satoor says:
> > "Derby implements the JDBC updatable resultset by using the existing
> >  updatable cursor implementation. And in order to do that, it requires
> >  that the SELECT statement should include the FOR UPDATE clause. One
> >  can change the Derby implementation so that it does not require FOR
> >  UPDATE clause to piggyback on updatable cursor implementation."
> > Dan DeBrunner says:
> > "Technically I wonder if this is covered by the JDBC standard, I see
> >  nothing in the JDBC 3.0 that states any requirements for the SQL
> >  statement for an updateable result set. I know the JDBC tutorial book
> >  has some guidelines as to what will typically work, but isn't it up to
> >  the database engine to define what works here?
> >  Having said that I think that not requiring the FOR UPDATE would be a
> >  useful improvement."
> 
> -- 
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
>    http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see:
>    http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> 

-- 
Bernt Marius Johnsen, Database Technology Group, 
Sun Microsystems, Trondheim, Norway

Mime
View raw message